The Amazing Spider-Man The Amazing Spider-Man (First Reactions: Critics, Fans) (Spoiler Alert) - - - - - Part 14

[Jexx]

I like winnie the pooh.

 

[ALP]

So does Curtis Connors PhD.

 

[Jexx]

But he's in prison. Not a good role model at the moment.

 

[ALP]

Y'know, my first reaction to this movie was that there were no dance scenes like in Spider-Man 3. I wanted to see Connors dancing in the kitchen while frying eggs with his girlfriend.

 

[Jexx]

..I just realized I'm probably the age Peter is in this movie.

Okay, I need to get to New York, find Oscorp, get bit by a spider, buy webbing, somehow make web shooters, make a costume, and them swing around new york.

I'll be Hobo the Spider-Man! Or is it Spider-Man the Hobo?

All I know is that as Spider-Man, it will be my responsibility to get Curt Connor's his towel.

 

[the.wolf]

Y'know, my first reaction to this movie was that there were no dance scenes like in Spider-Man 3. I wanted to see Connors dancing in the kitchen while frying eggs with his girlfriend.

Or even reading lines from a play he wrote for said girlfriend, while he was in high school.

..I just realized I'm probably the age Peter is in this movie.

Okay, I need to get to New York, find Oscorp, get bit by a spider, buy webbing, somehow make web shooters, make a costume, and them swing around new york.

I'll be Hobo the Spider-Man! Or is it Spider-Man the Hobo?

All I know is that as Spider-Man, it will be my responsibility to get Curt Connor's his towel.

errr... Spider-Hobo?

 

[Sharkboy]

I went out of this film thinking it was a decent film, but the more i think back on it, i keep talking over with my friends about the parts i really liked, and i've come to the conclusion that i really really liked the film, I'm afraid that if i watch it again, I'll end up seeing all the "meh" parts again and it will ruin my ever growing love for the first experience, but I'll bite the bullet.

 

[PSYLENTGuardian]

Or even reading lines from a play he wrote for said girlfriend, while he was in high school.

Or taking the serum and becoming Harry Osborn instead.

Wait, that can't be right...

 

[J.Howlett]

The argument as to whether or not the film states/shows that Peter acknowledges that he's responsible for his Uncle's death is an interesting discussion because it comes down to a matter of how you interpret a series of choices by the director, actor, and the editor. Reading Film Critic Hulk's editorial on it and the rebuttals made me rethink the sequences of events because for a lot of people, it seems, this is the essence of Spider-Man.

What's funny is that with everything that's essentially the same between this film and Raimi's, this part is even closes than other examples.

Essentially, both have a moment of clarity when it comes to the identification of the killer. And at the end of the moment, both sulk. Tobey does it on the rooftop of a building. Andrew does it in the corner of his room, unable to listen to his Uncle's message fully.

The difference comes in that afterwards, the paths are different. Tobey's version graduates, has a moment of sadness after graduation in his room where he thinks and states how much he misses his Uncle. Moments later, he looks at the sketch again and Uncle Ben's voice over plays with the famous line and off we go, he's Spider-Man.

We get an entire portion of the second half of Andrew's interpretation where he vigilantes. He is then set straight by Captain Stacy and the sequence in the bridge, and then through action, spends the rest of the second half of the picture taking responsibility for something that he feels he has to. It is not until we have the scene where Peter listens to Uncle Ben's full voicemail that we understand that he does in fact blame himself for what happened.

As an aside, there is another moment that also clarifies his guilt. Before the dinner at the Stacy's house, Peter comes home after another night of vigilante and Aunt May confronts him. Towards the end of the confrontation, she tried to comfort him but he immediately rejects it.

Why?

 

[Eggyman]

I went out of this film thinking it was a decent film, but the more i think back on it, i keep talking over with my friends about the parts i really liked, and i've come to the conclusion that i really really liked the film, I'm afraid that if i watch it again, I'll end up seeing all the "meh" parts again and it will ruin my ever growing love for the first experience, but I'll bite the bullet.

I thought that, but it didn't work out on repeat viewings. The bits I didn't like we're still there, but all the things I did like somehow had improved and I saw more in them. It's quite a deep yet subtle film in some ways and is better on repeat viewings.

 

[Scarlettess]

The argument as to whether or not the film states/shows that Peter acknowledges that he's responsible for his Uncle's death is an interesting discussion because it comes down to a matter of how you interpret a series of choices by the director, actor, and the editor. Reading Film Critic Hulk's editorial on it and the rebuttals made me rethink the sequences of events because for a lot of people, it seems, this is the essence of Spider-Man.

What's funny is that with everything that's essentially the same between this film and Raimi's, this part is even closes than other examples.

Essentially, both have a moment of clarity when it comes to the identification of the killer. And at the end of the moment, both sulk. Tobey does it on the rooftop of a building. Andrew does it in the corner of his room, unable to listen to his Uncle's message fully.

The difference comes in that afterwards, the paths are different. Tobey's version graduates, has a moment of sadness after graduation in his room where he thinks and states how much he misses his Uncle. Moments later, he looks at the sketch again and Uncle Ben's voice over plays with the famous line and off we go, he's Spider-Man.

We get an entire portion of the second half of Andrew's interpretation where he vigilantes. He is then set straight by Captain Stacy and the sequence in the bridge, and then through action, spends the rest of the second half of the picture taking responsibility for something that he feels he has to. It is not until we have the scene where Peter listens to Uncle Ben's full voicemail that we understand that he does in fact blame himself for what happened.

As an aside, there is another moment that also clarifies his guilt. Before the dinner at the Stacy's house, Peter comes home after another night of vigilante and Aunt May confronts him. Towards the end of the confrontation, she tried to comfort him but he immediately rejects it.

Why?

Great post! I thought it was quite evident that he feels responsible. Heck you can even see it straight after Ben's been shot. Also it's why he feels even more responsible for Conners, because he wasn't able to stop Ben being shot, he HAS to stop this.

I thought that, but it didn't work out on repeat viewings. The bits I didn't like we're still there, but all the things I did like somehow had improved and I saw more in them. It's quite a deep yet subtle film in some ways and is better on repeat viewings.

Yup I agree, saw it again last night. At first the one complaint I had was The Lizard, but after seeing it again I feel alot better about him and actually ended up liking him alot and his story alot more the second go round.

 

[J.Howlett]

I think the reason the film feels as if Peter doesn't take responsibility or ownership of the death is because of how the Connor's plot essentially tangents the story.

Thematically, the Connors plot works to the overall growth of the Peter arc. But, I don't think it logically fits to the story they WERE telling.

It's not completely smooth, the transition. I mean, if you think about it, after the dinner and the sequence on the bridge and the moment in his room where he thinks about where he is and what this represents, he immediately the next morning goes to Connors office.

Logically, there's no reason for him to make that move.

Or did his conversation with Gwen in the stands happen before or after he goes to see Connors?k

 

[StarLord]

The part I didn't like was very similar to SM3.

When he was making his way to Oscorp at the end and the news reporters and helicopters were following him.

''Can he make it?''....

 

[J.Howlett]

The part I didn't like was very similar to SM3.

When he was making his way to Oscorp at the end and the news reporters and helicopters were following him.

''Can he make it?''....

Yeah, not the best of moments.

 

[Lunar_Wolf]

I think the reason the film feels as if Peter doesn't take responsibility or ownership of the death is because of how the Connor's plot essentially tangents the story.

That was a gripe I had. There's never the acknowledgment of Ben going out looking for Peter at all; Peter never blames himself. I feel the flick missed that massive nail on the head.

 

[J.Howlett]

That was a gripe I had. There's never the acknowledgment of Ben going out looking for Peter at all; Peter never blames himself. I feel the flick missed that massive nail on the head.

The film does acknowledge it. We see him looking for Peter. We see that Peter knows that his Uncle is looking for him.

 

[Lunar_Wolf]

The film does acknowledge it. We see him looking for Peter. We see that Peter knows that his Uncle is looking for him.

But Peter never acknowledge's that it was he's fault.

 

[J.Howlett]

But Peter never acknowledge's that it was he's fault.

I think it does. It's just not overt as Raimi's.

I mean, he sulks in the corner of his room, unable to listen to Ben's full voice mail...after we see that he recognized the killer from the store from the visual description/wanted flyer.

Him being able to listen to the full voice mail at the very end of the film is the exclamation point that he fully understands what he's responsible for and what he must do from here on out....

 

[Herolee10]

Aside from the execution of Connors as a villain, here were my only real complaints with the film:

1. Given on how much flak that the film has been getting for following certain beats from Raimi's films, I'm wondering if that's why they took out Conners having a family, thinking that it might be similar to Doc Oct or Sandman. But I still think that it would have added more layers.

2. I thought that there was too much music going on in the sense where I think some scenes didn't need to have a musical score going on in the background.

3. I kind of wished that they had not lost the focus on Peter looking for his parents during the second half of the film and granted, while the theme will be played throughout the trilogy, it would have been nice to somehow spread that out more in the second half.

 

[StarLord]

Another small gripe I had was with Lizard's voice.

Either they could have made it deeper and more vicious, or left it out completely.

 

[TheSpectacular]

So the film again last night. Even better this time. The crowd was more into it this time. Also in the sewers I thought I heard his spider-sense go off before the lizard attacks.

 

[Scarlettess]

Aside from the execution of Connors as a villain, here were my only real complaints with the film:

1. Given on how much flak that the film has been getting for following certain beats from Raimi's films, I'm wondering if that's why they took out Conners having a family, thinking that it might be similar to Doc Oct or Sandman. But I still think that it would have added more layers.

2. I thought that there was too much music going on in the sense where I think some scenes didn't need to have a musical score going on in the background.

3. I kind of wished that they had not lost the focus on Peter looking for his parents during the second half of the film and granted, while the theme will be played throughout the trilogy, it would have been nice to somehow spread that out more in the second half.

I kinda agree with all these, good point on the first one, actually looking back every Raimi villain had a family, except for Venom. (Harry didn't have one in SM3 but he had already lost it so...) the third i din't really have problem with as its eveident there gonna cover more of that in the sequel.

 

[jmc]

Finally saw the movie, review as follows.

I'll preface by saying I'm not a massive Spidey fan but do find the character likeable, I enjoyed films one and two when they came out (film three didn't happen as far as I'm concerned), but they weren't without their problems and quite frankly haven't aged terribly well. So when footage started arriving for this film with it's Nolan-esque tone I was keenly interested and waited for it's arrival with baited breath. The results are a film that never really has much wrong with it, but at the same time suffers too much from a case of deja vu.

Everything about this film is perfectly fine, the tone, the acting, the action, the humour, there's nothing really wrong going on, but at the same time I walked out of the theatre feeling as if I'd already seen this movie before, and to be honest we already have in Spider-Man 1, the more I thought about it the more Amazing Spider-Man shares the same story to it's predecessor. I do think it was a much better interpretation of a Spider-Man origin story, there is far more weight and the world is far more realistic but it's still walking over similar territory which begs the question as to whether or not a reboot is to soon, I can only answer for myself but it's leaning heavily toward too soon.

The performances are good, I liked Garfield as Parker, at the very least he managed to distance himself from Maguire's performance, he's cocky and far from a push over and fit's the role perfectly, even thought it's probably unfair to do so given the tonal differences of the film I definitely think he's the better Peter Parker and Spider-Man.

The rest of the cast are good, Emma Stone, gorgeous as hell, Martin Sheen is great in anything just about, Denis Leary solid, Ryhs Ifans is fine but not all that interesting a villain, no-one really puts a foot wrong and everyone feels very real.

Biggest issues with this film outside of the recycled story I believe is the pacing, the film feels like it's longer than it should be, but perhaps the familiarity may also have some thing to do with it. There's also the villain of Lizard, he's not incredibly threatening or menacing, great to watch during the fights, but outside that Dr. Connors is your typical mad scientist type of character. i also felt Uncle Ben's death was swept away all to suddenly and never really affected Peter as much as it should have.

Overall, Amazing Spider-Man is not a bad movie, it's not even a mediocre movie, it's a likable movie, but there's just something about it that prevents from being a lovable movie. As I said the territory feels as if it's already been covered and whilst the argument could be made that there's more than one way to do it (which I agree with) the fact that film one still lingers quite heavily in the memory make it difficult for that familiarity not to affect ones viewing. That said I firmly believe had this been the first Spider-Man movie ever it would be looked upon far more favourably.

A reasonable 7.5/10.

 

[Eddie Brock]

I think the reason the film feels as if Peter doesn't take responsibility or ownership of the death is because of how the Connor's plot essentially tangents the story.

Thematically, the Connors plot works to the overall growth of the Peter arc. But, I don't think it logically fits to the story they WERE telling.

It's not completely smooth, the transition. I mean, if you think about it, after the dinner and the sequence on the bridge and the moment in his room where he thinks about where he is and what this represents, he immediately the next morning goes to Connors office.

Logically, there's no reason for him to make that move.

Or did his conversation with Gwen in the stands happen before or after he goes to see Connors?k

I believe the bleacher scene came first. It was immediately before he goes to Connors' office, if I remember correctly.

 

[Jexx]

I wish the coach said his line. That football scene was hilarious.